Is Villanova or Brown better for an open curriculum style undergraduate experience?

Brown is the clearer choice for an open-curriculum undergraduate experience. Brown’s curriculum is built around student choice, with no general education requirements in the usual sense, and students have unusual freedom to explore across departments before settling into a concentration. Villanova does offer some flexibility, but its academic structure is much more defined by university core requirements.

At Brown, the defining feature is that you are not working through a traditional core. You still complete concentration requirements, but outside that, students have broad control over what they study and how they shape their academic path. Brown also uses options like Satisfactory/No Credit that reinforce experimentation, which matters if you want to try classes in very different areas without feeling locked into a narrow plan early.

Villanova is flexible in a more limited way. It has a substantial liberal arts core rooted in its Augustinian and Catholic educational model, so undergraduates are expected to take a structured set of courses across disciplines. That can be valuable if you want guided breadth, but it does mean less freedom to build your schedule entirely around your own interests from the start.

Another difference is the feel of exploration. Brown’s advising culture and academic reputation are closely tied to self-direction, interdisciplinary study, and student-designed paths. Villanova encourages exploration too, but within a more intentionally structured framework. If what you mean by “not feeling boxed in” is maximum control over your course choices from the first year on, Brown fits that description much more closely.